Posted on 05/27/2017 7:06:10 AM PDT by rktman
Two people were fatally stabbed after trying to intervene when a man was spewing "hate speech" on a Portland, Oregon train on Friday, police said.
The suspect, who was not immediately identified, was captured south of the Hollywood transit center shortly after the 4:30 p.m. stabbing on a MAX light rail train, Portland police Sgt. Pete Simpson said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
This fellow looks potentially like he could be built like a middle linebacker; iow, strong.
LEOs are trained to keep a 30 foot distance from a perp weilding an edged instrument.
Even drawn, locked, and loaded there is not enough reaction time if the perp charges from a lesser distance.
An equal opportunity hater?
> So someone was engaged in free speech, was attacked by two ‘liberals’, and defended himself? <
Quite the spin there. He slashed at the throats of three people, and killed two of them. To claim self-defense, those three people must have mounted a serious physical assault on the knife wielder.
And that’s not likely. Sometimes murder is just that, murder.
Why is it when the lamestream media report something these days, we have to spend 5 Pages trying to guess what the heck it is their reporting?
nope- words of love are all you’re allowed to use for self defense- and even then you might be sued for offendign your attacker
PS: That attack was caused by globull warming or climate change, one or the other. Or both.
Well, I’ve read a bit more. Appears that he was attacked by either Muzzis or their defenders.
Yes, if a guy is attacked by two or three people, he’s going to need to use more force to defend himself than if it is one-on-one. One should always be in reasonable fear of one’s life when dealing with jihaddis.
A train full of people and all these details alleging hate, yet no mention of what actually happened. Very odd.
“””Well, I’ve read a bit more. Appears that he was attacked by either Muzzis or their defenders.”””
That was my gut feeling here. The article seems to be doing everything it can to discredit suspect before he ever gets to court, yet failed to describe any details of the actual incident.
Since the article lacks almost all details of the actual event, why is that not likely?
Bullshit that only lawyers and others who have never been in this situation believe is "reasonable" behavior. If you are attacked by a group, you have no idea how many are part of the gang, or what weapons they have. I've had knives pulled by "unarmed innocent bystanders" before who were with the hoodrats, so if you are attacked by a group and I'm on the jury, I'm going to give you a HUGE benefit of the doubt. Your life is at risk and you need to act in a split second to kill as many attackers as possible, or they could just as easily kill you or someone you love.
Need to say they were “transitioning” and now sue for discrimination against “persons” of protected class!
> Yes, if a guy is attacked by two or three people, he’s going to need to use more force to defend himself than if it is one-on-one. One should always be in reasonable fear of one’s life when dealing with jihaddis. <
Two very good points there. It will all boil down to how much reasonable fear the knife wielder felt. From what I’ve read so far, he slashed at those three people just because they objected to his ranting.
Did those three people lay hands on the knife wielder? No word on that yet, one way or the other.
In fact the first sentence in the article seems suspect. If someone is talking about whatever in a public venue, there is no need, or duty for anyone to "Intervene".
And what does "Intervene" mean? Why did the article not specifically say what they did when they, "Intervened"?
This story fails in pertinent details, yet overwhelmingly succeed in portraying the suspect as a hater. Very odd.
The first sentence in the article seems suspect. If someone is talking about whatever in a public venue, there is no need, or duty for anyone to "Intervene". And what do they mean by "Intervene"?
I think I’ll design a gun that looks like a burrito...
The vulgarity aside, you make some very good points. If you under-react to such a situation, you could end up in the morgue. But if you over-react, you could end up doing twenty years.
And yeah, I know, better to be tried by 12 then carried by 6.
Well, it was ‘nbc’ so..................
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.